Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ubuntu Satanic Edition: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
|||
| (30 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
<!--Template:Afd top
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result was '''DELETE'''. [[User:Larry V|Larry V]] <small>([[User talk:Larry V|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Larry V|contribs]])</small> 10:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
===[[Ubuntu Satanic Edition]]===
:{{la|Ubuntu Satanic Edition}} <includeonly> — ([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ubuntu Satanic Edition|View AfD]])</includeonly>
Just a desktop theme, no more notable than anything on freshmeat. [[User:Twinxor|Twinxor]] ''[[User_talk:Twinxor|t]]'' 04:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Line 6 ⟶ 12:
*'''Speedy delete under [[Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#A7|A7]].''' NN web content. [[User:Pop Secret|Pop Secret]] 05:14, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - fails [[WP:SOFTWARE]]. Wouldn't qualify as web content, I don't think. [[User:MER-C|MER-C]] 05:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' fails both [[WP:SOFTWARE]] and [[WP:WEB]]. <
*'''Delete''', I don't think specific desktop themes are notable. [[User:JIP|<
*'''Keep''' it's a desktop theme as of right now, but it will become a distro of its own later. It's a new project, give it some time. [[User:EliasAlucard|EliasAlucard]]|[[User talk:EliasAlucard|Talk]] 16:28, 15 Dec, 2006 (UTC)
**Things that might become notable in the future are rarely appropriate at the moment; [[WP:NOT|Wikipedia is not]] a crystal ball. If it becomes notable, the article can always be recreated then. --[[User:ais523|ais523]] 15:35, 15 December 2006 ([[User:ais523|U]][[User talk:ais523|T]][[Special:Contributions/Ais523|C]])
*'''Delete''' It's just a desktop theme that's wandering around on the net. Though I agree that if it becomes a distro it should be recreated.--[[User:Jonnylinuxnerd|Jonnylinuxnerd]] 16:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
** It depends on its userbase and unique features, of course, but I wonder what would be notable about such a distro. Right now, I could distribute a version of Ubuntu with this desktop theme included, but it not seem to be significant. [[User:Twinxor|Twinxor]] ''[[User_talk:Twinxor|t]]'' 23:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per [[WP:SOFTWARE]]. [[User:Dragomiloff|Dragomiloff]] 22:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' See if it evoles to be a good article, it's unfair to delete something based on a stub. This has gotten alot of attention in it's lifespan, and is certainly noticeable. And it may "only be a theme" on the site, but that's because there's nowhere to host a 666Mb file, so donations are being taken for a server, etc. It's not doing anyone any harm, it should stay. [[User:Matt.Hoy|Matt]] 01:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
** Again, there's no evidence of a significant community or notable features in the distro. [[User:Twinxor|Twinxor]] ''[[User_talk:Twinxor|t]]'' 09:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per [[WP:SOFTWARE]]. [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] 01:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' it seems tp be popular within the Ubuntu comunity, and it's still a stub. - CchristianTehWazzit
*'''Delete''' It isn't notable right now. Maybe it will be at some point in the future, but [[WP:CRYSTAL|Wikipedia is not a crystal ball]]. —[[User:ShadowHalo|ShadowHalo]] 03:47, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' in oppose to [[Ubuntu Christian Edition]]. ''Duality'' is what Wikipedia needs for a better NPOV. --[[User:Ragnarok Addict|Ragnarok Addict]] 15:09, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
**That would be a case of [[false balance]]. A topic is not notable because it parodies something notable. [[User:Twinxor|Twinxor]] ''[[User_talk:Twinxor|t]]'' 02:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' This smells strongly of censorship on religious grounds. The fact that it's very existence has generated this much debate justifies it's inclusion - [[User:Cathbard|Cathbard]] 18:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per [[WP:SOFTWARE]]. No evidence of notability in the stub. A "censorship on religious grounds" in an AfD discussion itself does not give notability.--[[User:Ioannes Pragensis|Ioannes Pragensis]] 21:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' 'This article or section contains information about scheduled or expected future software.' How many articles are there on Wikipedia with this headline? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/209.6.176.89|209.6.176.89]] ([[User talk:209.6.176.89|talk]]) 19:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
**No one's suggesting the article is to be deleted on that basis. [[User:Twinxor|Twinxor]] ''[[User_talk:Twinxor|t]]'' 05:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' One sentence plus an external link to the releasers. With only one link, it just escapes [[WP:NOT#REPOSITORY]], but it appears to be spam. There isn't enough content to be a valid stub. [[User:GRBerry|GRBerry]] 04:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per [[WP:SOFTWARE]]. :: <em>[[User:Colin Keigher|Colin Keigher]]</em> ([[User talk:Colin Keigher|Talk]]) 08:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Entirely non-notable. Keeping solely because we have [[Ubuntu Christian Edition]] is entirely invalid. --- [[User:RockMFR|RockMFR]] 00:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Redirect''' to [[Ubuntu Christian Edition]]. I'm boldly adding a sentence to that article noting its existence. [[User:WMMartin|WMMartin]] 20:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||